In modern times a great deal of nonsense is talked about masters and disciples, and about the inheritance of a master's teaching by favorite pupils, entitling them to pass the truth on to their adherents. Of course Zen should be imparted in this way, from heart to heart, and in the past it was really accomplished. Silence and humility reigned rather than profession and assertion. The one who received such a teaching kept the matter hidden even after twenty years. Not until another discovered through his own need that a real master was at hand was it learned that the teching had been imparted, and even then the occasion arose quite naturally and the teaching made its way in its own right. Under no circumstance did the teacher even claim "I am the successor of So-and-so." Such a claim would prove quite the contrary.

The Zen master Mu-nan had only one successor. His name was Shoju. After Shoju had completed his study of Zen, Mu-nan called him into his room. "I am getting old," he said, "and as far as I know, Shoju, you are the only one who will carry on this teaching. Here is a book. It has been passed down from master to master for seven generations. I have also added many points according to my understanding. The book is very valuable, and I am giving it to you to represent your successorhip."

"If the book is such an important thing, you had better keep it," Shoju replied. "I received your Zen without writing and am satisfied with it as it is."

"I know that," said Mu-nan. "Even so, this work has been carried from master to master for seven generations, so you may keep it as a symbol of having received the teaching. Here."

They happened to be talking before a brazier. The instant Shoju felt the book in his hands he thrust it into the flaming coals. He had no lust for possessions.

Mu-nan, who never had been angry before, yelled: "What are you doing!"

I found that story confronting when I first read it many years ago, but I think it says something very important about attachment to forms and externals. It was one of many such stories in Zen Flesh, Zen Bones, by Paul Reps.

I delved a little into the background of that book. Paul Reps was a 'student', in a very informal sense, of Nyogen Senzaki, who was one of the pioneers of Zen in the US. He arrived as an assistant to Soyen Shaku in 1905 and stayed until the end of his life in the 1958. He had to work as a bell-boy and in other basic jobs in San Francisco before he got enough support from his students to start renting rooms to teach in. He eventually moved his 'floating Zendo' to Los Angeles in the 1930's and kept teaching throughout. The book of his collected writings is Like a Dream, Like a Fantasy edited by Eido Shimano Roshi.

Here is about the only photograph of him:

Learn to do good, refrain from evil, purify the mind ~ this is the teaching of the Buddhas

I would be curious to see what terms of respect are used in other languages, since "master" is just an English word. For example, I know that "shifu" is the word for teacher in Chinese, but do the Chinese have any sort of "Super Shifu" word which they use when talking about undisputably great Zen Masters like Linji, Dongshan Liangjie, etc.? If so, it would be interesting to know their criteria for when they use such a word.

seeker242 wrote:And how can this be done without having a hierarchy of people maintaining control over other people, telling them what to do? Who is going to be in charge of "the system"?

By recognising the qualities of others, their experience, knowledge, kindness and wisdom, there are people who one considers good friends from whom one can learn. Usually lay people learn from monastics, and in the monastery there is a seniority system. Buddhism doesn't work like the Catholic Church, there is no strict hierarchy, no Magisterium. Whatever one teacher says is not compulsory for anyone else to accept it. The Zen tradition itself is diverse. And there is no need for any control over others. By "system" I mean the way people are taught about the Dharma. And either one accepts the idea that people are capable of comprehending and practising the teaching (one of the meanings of universal buddha-nature), or doesn't accept it.

"There is no such thing as the real mind. Ridding yourself of delusion: that's the real mind."(Sheng-yen: Getting the Buddha Mind, p 73)